Question about the Navy Arms LeMat

[Jake C]

Howdy All!

I was at my local gunshot today when I noticed something on the bottom shelf- a LeMat, the first one I'd ever seen. It was a .44 by Navy Arms. I was able to handle and was surprised at how good it felt in the hand, but I did notice something odd. The amount of force required to pull the hammer back was ridiculous.

Now I'm a bit of a neophyte in terms of old west guns and the such, but in my limited experience it seemed like there had to be something wrong with the gun. Is that the case, or are LeMats just kind of odd like that?

[Major 2]

It's both the geometry (the radius and  length of pull)  and the heavy spring ( inherent with Cap & Ball ) to set off the caps .

When Val Forgett first commissioned Pietta make these in the early 80's , I had pair, both early 3 digit Serial # ed Cavalry models.
You almost have to dislocate your thumb to cock them the 10 times to discharge all rounds & the shotgun tube.
Nothing has changed...
Very nice quality , by the way.

[Jake C]

It's both the geometry (the radius and  length of pull)  and the heavy spring ( inherent with Cap & Ball ) to set off the caps .

When Val Forgett first commissioned Pietta make these in the early 80's , I had pair, both early 3 digit Serial # ed Cavalry models.
You almost have to dislocate your thumb to cock them the 10 times to discharge all rounds & the shotgun tube.
Nothing has changed...
Very nice quality , by the way.

It was definitely a quality pistol, and just beyond beautiful. No way I'd be able to afford one though at over a grand.

Thanks for the answer, I was just a bit curious.

[Major 2]

Just as an aside..the purchase for the cavalry model back in the early 80's was $350 

I bought a new Henry Rifle (Uberti) in 1980...$375 shipped including 10% FFL fee 

[St. George]

Owning a LeMat is just like owning a boat.

The owner's two happiest days are the day he brings it home, and the day he finally sells it...

They were built well before 'Bangety-Bang!' was the rule of the day, and there were inventors of all stripes running about, bumping into one another - all trying to build the perfect sidearm.

For Cavalry tactics of the time, the Trooper used the saber first - 'then' the revolver - and it must've seemed like a grand idea, but if it had actually been such - both sides would have equipped themselves with them - and they didn't.

Navy Arms and Pietta produced a pretty revolver, though - and an impressive one - perfect if your Impression is that of a Confederate Cavalry Officer ( there are so many of those in C&WAS that if they all owned one, they'd have to re-start the production line to equip them all), but impractical, due largely to the ergonomics.

And think about that for a minute.

Back when the originals were first on the scene, men weren't built on the 'grand scale' that they are, today.

They likely didn't top out at a full 5'6", because that would be the average height of the American Doughboy in WWI - 50+ years later, so the bulk of the men fighting in the Civil War were fairly fresh off the boat from the Old Country, and the combining gene pools and improving nutrition hadn't even begun to catch up to start to build them up in size, so these were literally hand cannons.

Goes a long way toward explaining the small triggerguard on the squareback 1851 Navy and the length of those rope-and-key bed frames, doesn't it?

Scouts Out!